The Associated Press is reporting on the debate going on in Belgium over children being allowed to decide to end their own lives.

This is not assisted suicide. Neither is it "pallitive sedation" where the physician puts you under and then removes all life support, including a feeding tube. You die of starvation. This is the doctor sticking a needle in your arm and ending your life.

And Belgium wants to grant that option to children.

Advocates argue that euthanasia for children, with the consent of their parents, is necessary to give families an option in a desperately painful situation. But opponents have questioned whether children can reasonably decide to end their own lives.

Belgium is already a euthanasia pioneer; it legalized the practice for adults in 2002. In the last decade, the number of reported cases per year has risen from 235 deaths in 2003 to 1,432 in 2012, the last year for which statistics are available. Doctors typically give patients a powerful sedative before injecting another drug to stop their heart.

Only a few countries have legalized euthanasia or anything approaching it.

In the Netherlands, euthanasia is legal under specific circumstances and for children over the age of 12 with parental consent. (There is an understanding that infants, too, can be euthanized, and that doctors will not be prosecuted if they act appropriately.) Elsewhere in Europe, euthanasia is only legal in Luxembourg. Assisted suicide, where doctors help patients to die but do not actively kill them, is allowed in Switzerland.

The Netherlands is the home of the notorious Groningen Protocol - guidelines for doctors and hospitals on how to kill an infant and not break the law.

The fact is, as some ethicists point out, we've been on a slipperly slope for more than a decade and the Belgium proposals are just the latest manifestation of an argument that has been raging about how patients should be allowed to face the end of life:

Charles Fostr, who teaches medical law and ethics at Oxford University, believes children couldn't possibly have the capacity to make an informed decision about euthanasia since even adults struggle with the concept.

"It often happens that when people get into the circumstances they had so feared earlier, they manage to cling on all the more," he said. "Children, like everyone else, may not be able to anticipate how much they will value their lives if they were not killed."

There are others, though, who argue that because Belgium has already approved euthanasia for adults, it is unjust to deny it to children.

"The principle of euthanasia for children sounds shocking at first, but it's motivated by compassion and protection," said John Harris, a professor of bioethics at the University of Manchester. "It's unfair to provide euthanasia differentially to some citizens and not to others (children) if the need is equal."

To be clear, this is not pulling the plug on a breathing machine keeping a brain dead patient alive, or allowing "Do Not Resuscitate" orders from patients or their legal guardian. This is the a far more impersonal and destructive way of death with the additional moral hazard of believing a child can decide for themselves that life isn't worth living anymore.

Less shocking, but perhaps more problematic is that rules would also be written for patients suffering from early dementia:

People now can make a written declaration they wish to be euthanized if their health deteriorates, but the request is only valid for five years and they must be in an irreversible coma. The new proposal would abolish the time limit and the requirement the patient be in a coma, making it possible for someone who is diagnosed with Alzheimer's to be put to death years later in the future.

In the Netherlands, guidelines allow doctors to euthanize dementia patients on this basis if they believe the person is experiencing "unbearable suffering," but few are done in practice.

Dr. Patrick Cras, a neurologist at the University of Antwerp, said people with dementia often change their minds about wanting to die.

"They may turn into different people and may not have the same feelings about wanting to die as when they were fully competent," he said. "I don't see myself killing another person if he or she isn't really aware of exactly what's happening simply on the basis of a previous written request (to have euthanasia). I haven't fully made up my mind but I think this is going too far."

There is so much we don't know about the mind, about consciousness, that it seems incredible that society would allow this practice on its most vulnerable and helpless members. If the state is not there to protect them, then abuses are bound to occur. Last year in Belgium, a patient who suffered from a botched sex change operation was euthanized, despite no outward signs of physical suffering.

The agenda of death and the devaluation of life marches on; apparently Europe has become a hotbed for its evil...

Didn't Obama claim it was the death of children in Syria that made him want to go after Assad? Say yes. I would be willing to bet he has no problem with this idea, he may not admit it, but I'll bet he approves. If he says no, well, we already know that he will lie about anything as long it helps the outcome he wants. :Obounce:

Logged

“A society does not ever die ‘from natural causes’, but always dies from suicide or murder – and nearly always from the former….” ― Arnold Joseph Toynbee’s A Study of History.

What is wrong with it? When our four legged companions are in too much pain, we have a bloody good cry and have them put to sleep. How is doing the same for a child any different? In terms of mercy, we treat our pets better than our children.

Fun fact to ponder on - The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children - a good and decent cause - was originally a secondary function of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

The problem may be that too many children will be "put down" because their behaviors are bad, they embarrassed the parents, the parents found out they couldn't afford them, etc. We put animals (I had to put my 16 year old dog down about 2 months ago) because they are too old to live normally old, sick, or in pain, usually. I see no assurance that will happen with kids and any politician who wants to get the votes of the pro-choice crowd will insure there is a loophole to make sure kids can be put down any time they want. After all, Hitler made the decision to put young kids down for the parents and the way governments are today it will become a tool for the government to control the population.

Logged

“A society does not ever die ‘from natural causes’, but always dies from suicide or murder – and nearly always from the former….” ― Arnold Joseph Toynbee’s A Study of History.

First and most important - I am sorry about your dog. It always hurts and never gets any easier to deal with.

I can't see your scenario happening though. Three reasons:

1 - protecting children is so ingrained in our culture that anyone who attempted this would be a bloody smear on the road. There is a reason the pro-death lot insist that a fetus is a blob of cells instead of a person.

2 - it would be economic suicide. Without them, no one is safe. To put it brutally and bluntly, they grow, work and pay for your pension. Their stupid risk taking provides a steady supply of organs for transplants, leading to longer lives over all.

3 - the most important one. All innovation is done by the young, including the ones that tend to be labelled as dysfunctional. A society that takes out the young and the curious is a dead society. It just hasn't started stinking yet.

Oceander

First and most important - I am sorry about your dog. It always hurts and never gets any easier to deal with.

I can't see your scenario happening though. Three reasons:

1 - protecting children is so ingrained in our culture that anyone who attempted this would be a bloody smear on the road. There is a reason the pro-death lot insist that a fetus is a blob of cells instead of a person.

2 - it would be economic suicide. Without them, no one is safe. To put it brutally and bluntly, they grow, work and pay for your pension. Their stupid risk taking provides a steady supply of organs for transplants, leading to longer lives over all.

3 - the most important one. All innovation is done by the young, including the ones that tend to be labelled as dysfunctional. A society that takes out the young and the curious is a dead society. It just hasn't started stinking yet.

Unfortunately, under what passes for current liberal/progressive thought in this country, these concerns are underplayed and underappreciated. For illustration I offer up the recent Time Magazine cover article on the "Childfree Life":

As the article makes clear, selfish liberals/progressives (but I repeat myself) do not have the wits to recognize the risks in your no. 2 and almost certainly think of themselves as eternally hip, cool, and therefore eternally the epitome of the "young and curious," so why would one need to make any more.

I would hazard that these suicidal trends in American progressive thought are fully mirrored in Western European thought and therefore that the risks you point to are also underplayed and underappreciated amongst the Western European power/political elite.

I would hazard that these suicidal trends in American progressive thought are fully mirrored in Western European thought and therefore that the risks you point to are also underplayed and underappreciated amongst the Western European power/political elite.

Oddly - we have a counterweight. One that is somewhat unexpected, but welcome.

Eastern Europeans.

They are so solidly family oriented, it will take generations for the left to shift them. To give you one concrete example. I was walking down the street. It is about 90% rentals and about 90% Eastern European. Young kid fell over and skinned their knee while I were passing - sort of age where you have to guess the sex because it doesn't mean much. Nothing, right? By the time I had him/her out of the street there were roughly 20 people watching me. Coming up to check and look out for the kid.

Oceander

Oddly - we have a counterweight. One that is somewhat unexpected, but welcome.

Eastern Europeans.

They are so solidly family oriented, it will take generations for the left to shift them. To give you one concrete example. I was walking down the street. It is about 90% rentals and about 90% Eastern European. Young kid fell over and skinned their knee while I were passing - sort of age where you have to guess the sex because it doesn't mean much. Nothing, right? By the time I had him/her out of the street there were roughly 20 people watching me. Coming up to check and look out for the kid.

That's not at all odd. I've seen that with Eastern Europeans who've come across The Pond as well. It also happens with a lot of other immigrants who live in communities that haven't fallen prey to the democrats/liberals/progressives.

First and most important - I am sorry about your dog. It always hurts and never gets any easier to deal with.

I can't see your scenario happening though. Three reasons:

1 - protecting children is so ingrained in our culture that anyone who attempted this would be a bloody smear on the road. There is a reason the pro-death lot insist that a fetus is a blob of cells instead of a person.

2 - it would be economic suicide. Without them, no one is safe. To put it brutally and bluntly, they grow, work and pay for your pension. Their stupid risk taking provides a steady supply of organs for transplants, leading to longer lives over all.

3 - the most important one. All innovation is done by the young, including the ones that tend to be labelled as dysfunctional. A society that takes out the young and the curious is a dead society. It just hasn't started stinking yet.

I spent the last 22 years of my working life teaching children 8-21 in residential facilities for abused, neglected, and abandoned youth. They were, raped, beaten, sodomized, burned, prostituted, forced to live on the street, took drugs and alcohol, and more. They were murderers, rapists, arsonists, attachment disordered, schizophrenic, sociopathic, emotionally disturbed, and many others. Many were highly intelligent, creative, and had real potential to do good things but I would never trust them to make a good decision about someone else's life, nor would I trust their parents as their decision making was already on display in front of me.

My first year at a residential unit, 1998, I had a student who was attending the regular High School in general ed. and was headed on the college though she had been assessed in elementary school as being mentally impaired. It seems the assessor didn't see the scar tissue on her arm that kept her from fully extending her arm; her father used to punish her by pouring boiling water on her in place that could not be seen with a long sleeve shirt on. On her last day we were talking and she said, "Scott, I'm one of the lucky one's because I was found. But there are a whole lot of kids at the high schools that need to be here (at the residential facility) a lot worse than I do."

My point? There are a plethora of people running around these days who do not care about kids, who don't care about what happens to them. Maybe the biggest group are politicians. Think about it. If kids could vote do you think the government would treat them with the real indifference they do? I started teaching in 1972 and have seen the indifference grow. These are not the people I want making decisions of life and death about anyone I know. Who is to say the person who could discover a cure for cancer hasn't already been aborted or wouldn't be if 'after birth' abortions or selective euthanasia were practiced. Who is to say the next Abraham Lincoln hasn't or wouldn't receive the same fate? Thomas Edison graduated from the 2nd grade but today would be at odds with society and government, maybe even in jail. To trust the life of anyone to government bureaucrats is to destroy the country.

Logged

“A society does not ever die ‘from natural causes’, but always dies from suicide or murder – and nearly always from the former….” ― Arnold Joseph Toynbee’s A Study of History.

My point? There are a plethora of people running around these days who do not care about kids, who don't care about what happens to them. Maybe the biggest group are politicians. Think about it. If kids could vote do you think the government would treat them with the real indifference they do? I started teaching in 1972 and have seen the indifference grow. These are not the people I want making decisions of life and death about anyone I know.

Always were. Abusive and neglectful a**holes are nothing new - just read Dickens for proof. 150 years ago and you could pretty much apply his observations to right now. That neither excuses it or makes it right. I am not 100% sold on the indifference growing. I think it is more that we see it more, hear of it more and tolerate it less because it is no longer something which happens behind closed doors and is kept silent about.

To politicians, children are props and excuses, not future producers and voters.

Always were. Abusive and neglectful a**holes are nothing new - just read Dickens for proof. 150 years ago and you could pretty much apply his observations to right now. That neither excuses it or makes it right. I am not 100% sold on the indifference growing. I think it is more that we see it more, hear of it more and tolerate it less because it is no longer something which happens behind closed doors and is kept silent about.

To politicians, children are props and excuses, not future producers and voters.

When an educational file came in on a new resident we jokingly could tell by the pounds per square inch just how bad the abuse had been. Each year the files got larger and the students younger. I once had a 3rd grader who had memorized entire scenes from Freddie Kruger movies. Was this kid psychotic? Is a shark's butt watertight? What is released to the public and what we saw are two entirely different things. Over those years I saw the kids coming with more and more of an entitlement mentality, popping kids to get more welfare was a good plan for them, and more violent. The kids of today seem to have little plan for the future except what "might" happen to them, are largely inept socially because of all the electronic toys, and an education means little to most of them. Here I am not talking just about kids in a residential facility but kids in general. Kids who had never heard of Pearl Harbor, who the president was, what the three branches of government were, etc. I was on a trip with some other teachers one time, and I knew the teacher next to me taught at a significant university, at least part time. She was grading English papers so I asked if I could read some. I was stunned and amazed. I asked what year these kids were in and she said seniors. I said H.S. students write this poorly? Then she hit me between the eyes when she said no, they were college seniors. No, things are not getting better in these areas and core curriculum isn't going to help.

« Last Edit: November 03, 2013, 04:51:31 PM by rangerrebew »

Logged

“A society does not ever die ‘from natural causes’, but always dies from suicide or murder – and nearly always from the former….” ― Arnold Joseph Toynbee’s A Study of History.

When an educational file came in on a new resident we jokingly could tell by the pounds per square inch just how bad the abuse had been. Each year the files got larger and the students younger. I once had a 3rd grader who had memorized entire scenes from Freddie Kruger movies. Was this kid psychotic? Is a shark's butt watertight? What is released to the public and what we saw are two entirely different things. Over those years I saw the kids coming with more and more of an entitlement mentality, popping kids to get more welfare was a good plan for them, and more violent. The kids of today seem to have little plan for the future except what "might" happen to them, are largely inept socially because of all the electronic toys, and an education means little to most of them. Here I am not talking just about kids in a residential facility but kids in general. Kids who had never heard of Pearl Harbor, who the president was, what the three branches of government were, etc. I was on a trip with some other teachers one time, and I knew the teacher next to me taught at a significant university, at least part time. She was grading English papers so I asked if I could read some. I was stunned and amazed. I asked what year these kids were in and she said seniors. I said H.S. students write this poorly? Then she hit me between the eyes when she said no, they were college seniors. No, things are not getting better in these areas and core curriculum isn't going to help.

That made me feel terribly sad. Not the abuse, though that is infuriating.

Words are weapons. The pen may not be mightier than the sword if you are hitting each other with them - but the pen cuts deeper and lasts longer. Our children are being systematically disarmed. As an ex-teacher myself, I am convinced there is a reason for this.

There is some significant evidence that thoughts are not fully complete or understood until spoken or written down. My doctorate was in treating PTSD and one of the most valuable therapies was the dream diary. Didn't even need to read them - the mere act of writing things down made the study patients calmer and less likely to have an episode of a panic attack or asocial behavior. That was across the board. Education level didn't matter. It helped them think things through.

Freud was a fraud in a lot of ways, but he did get that right. Talk things out.

But - every youngster posts everything they do on FB or twitter! They do. Poorly spelled and with no consideration of the rules of grammar. Those rules are there for a reason. They force people to think logically.

Back in the 70's when they were talking about making abortion legal many said that would lead to more and more lenient laws including euthanasia. A high proportion of the citizens back then apposed abortion than agreed with it. Then the supreme court made the change not we the people and it has led to later and later term abortions and now Europe who had legalized abortion a few years before us is beginning to talk of killing after birth and I will with certainty say it will happen here too. It happens slowly but surely whenever you allow evil in. Homosexuals were taken off the list of those considered to have a mental problems and then over they years became acceptable even though it is a mental problem no way were we meant to have sexual relations with the same sex our bodies prove this. You corrupt the minds of those coming up and as the older generations who would have never been ok with any of this dies off you are left with immorality in our homes our churches and our government. That is what has happened here in our country and all over the world it can't stand it won't but then I have faith and know what happens. Humans have always been evil but there was more good than evil in the world back then not so anymore.

I spent the last 22 years of my working life teaching children 8-21 in residential facilities for abused, neglected, and abandoned youth. They were, raped, beaten, sodomized, burned, prostituted, forced to live on the street, took drugs and alcohol, and more. They were murderers, rapists, arsonists, attachment disordered, schizophrenic, sociopathic, emotionally disturbed, and many others. Many were highly intelligent, creative, and had real potential to do good things but I would never trust them to make a good decision about someone else's life, nor would I trust their parents as their decision making was already on display in front of me.

My first year at a residential unit, 1998, I had a student who was attending the regular High School in general ed. and was headed on the college though she had been assessed in elementary school as being mentally impaired. It seems the assessor didn't see the scar tissue on her arm that kept her from fully extending her arm; her father used to punish her by pouring boiling water on her in place that could not be seen with a long sleeve shirt on. On her last day we were talking and she said, "Scott, I'm one of the lucky one's because I was found. But there are a whole lot of kids at the high schools that need to be here (at the residential facility) a lot worse than I do."

My point? There are a plethora of people running around these days who do not care about kids, who don't care about what happens to them. Maybe the biggest group are politicians. Think about it. If kids could vote do you think the government would treat them with the real indifference they do? I started teaching in 1972 and have seen the indifference grow. These are not the people I want making decisions of life and death about anyone I know. Who is to say the person who could discover a cure for cancer hasn't already been aborted or wouldn't be if 'after birth' abortions or selective euthanasia were practiced. Who is to say the next Abraham Lincoln hasn't or wouldn't receive the same fate? Thomas Edison graduated from the 2nd grade but today would be at odds with society and government, maybe even in jail. To trust the life of anyone to government bureaucrats is to destroy the country.

I have mentioned here about my personal experience with a brain bleed of some sort. I had very little wakefulness, most of which was little more than images or impressions.My only "contact" with the "other side" was a short discussion with a cat we needed to euthanize about a month and a half prior. There was another incident prior to my medical situation that really freaked me out and people were around me to witness it.There was another aspect and that was experiencing those who were praying for me. It was as if I could feel it, almost bathing me. There was also a feeling of knowing there was something beyond this life. As I have mentioned, not harps and halos or Heaven and Hell in the ethical retributive sense but another place. It exists and it calms me.As much as I am against abortion, I don't believe euthanasia should be against the law. I find it to be a primitive fear, like being buried alive. There are those who believe financial gain is a motive but most with that view are simpletons. Waiting upon the whim of a deity to relieve suffering or cure is a bit superstitious. We don't read the future by reading entrails anymore, do we?

This kind of "progressive" thinking is nothing new to Belgium, and quite frankly we should have abandoned these people to the wolves decades ago. Too bad Stalin didn't clean house in Belgium after the war, it would have been no loss; and with these people murdering their children and old people now it makes one wonder why we spent so much blood and gold to save these people during WWI and II.